C · Tier cited in support, beside route or transport evidence
Secondary Service Village A
“adjoins Kislingbury (Secondary Service Village A) with a school, shop, pubs and a regular bus to Northampton”
“notwithstanding its location beyond the settlement boundary, the site occupies a sustainable location for residential development”
58 homes (half of them affordable) on farmland at the eastern edge of Kislingbury, where West Northamptonshire has a supply shortfall of about 0.7 years. Officers accepted that the scheme met S5(1)(j): unmet need, physically well related to a service village, proportionate scale. They still recommended refusal because a stack of harms substantially outweighed the benefits: countryside encroachment, conservation area setting harm, poor design, SPA uncertainty and farm noise. The committee refused on 3 Sep and the notice was issued on 8 Sep.
Secondary Service Village with services and bus accepted for S5(1)(j); refused on a stack of harms. In the register this counts as a case where the tier was cited in support of the scheme beside route or transport evidence.
Application on the council planning portal · full decision note · quoted from cases/westnorthants-WNS-2022-0673-MAF.md